› appeal on question of law against Commissioner’s decision
› refurbishment of registered club premises; hours of operation and patron numbers
› use of outdoor area (part of former bowling green) for dining
› three grounds of appeal
› incorrect interpretation of provisions of the applicable Local Environment Plan (Ground 1); manifestly unreasonable decision (Ground 2); and denial of procedural fairness (Ground 3)
Appeal
› Ground 1
› cl 2.5 of the applicable Local Environment Plan provides special regime for site
› whether Commissioner’s interpretation of clause correct to exclude applicability of other clauses of the Local Environment Plan
› Commissioner’s reasoning incorrect
› nonetheless, a “fair reading” of the Commissioner’s decision discloses that he considered and dealt with the relevant matters, notwithstanding his conclusion that the clause was not applicable
› Ground 1 fails
Appeal
› Ground 3 considered prior to Ground 2
› no necessity to consider Ground 2 given Appellant’s success on Ground 3
Appeal
› Ground 3
› reasonable expectation that Commissioner would make general findings and permit parties to be heard on conditions appropriate to reflect findings
› imposition of condition of development consent without affording Appellant opportunity to be heard on its terms
› denial of procedural fairness under the circumstances
› Ground 3 made out
› appeal upheld
Case Details
Citation[2017] NSWLEC 69
CourtNSWLEC
JurisdictionNew South Wales
Unlock so much more with Barrister AI
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
